There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

technocrit ,

Third, we see a strong focus on providing AI literacy training and educating the workforce on how AI works, its potentials and limitations, and best practices for ethical AI use. We are likely to have to learn (and re-learn) how to use different AI technologies for years to come.

Useful?!? This is a total waste of time, energy, and resources for worthless chatbots.

IndiBrony ,
@IndiBrony@lemmy.world avatar

To be fair, it is useful in some regards.

I’m not a huge fan of Amazon, but last time I had an issue with a parcel it was sorted out insanely fast by the AI assistant on the website.

Within literally 2 minutes I’d had a refund confirmed. No waiting for people to eventually pick up the phone after 40 minutes. No misunderstanding or annoying questions. The moment I pressed send on my message it instantly started formulating a reply.

The truncated version went:

“Hey I meant to get [x] delivery, but it hasn’t arrived. Can I get a refund?”

“Sure, your money will go back into [y] account in a few days. If the parcel turns up in the meantime, you can send it back by dropping it off at [z]”

Done. Absolutely painless.

technocrit , (edited )

So how “intelligent” do you think the amazon returns bot is? As smart as a choose-your-own-adventure book, or a gerbil, or a human or beyond? Has it given you any useful life advice or anything?

SkyNTP ,

That has nothing to do with AI and is strictly a return policy matter. You can get a return in less than 2 minutes by speaking to a human at Home Depot.

Businesses choose to either prioritize customer experience, or not.

Frozyre ,

We should've known this fact, when we still have those input prompt voice operators that still can't for the life of it, understand some of the shit we tell it. That's the direction I saw this whole AI thing going and had a hunch that it was going to plummet because the big new shiny tech isn't all that it was cracked up to be.

To call it 'ending' though is a stretch. No, it'll be improved in time and it'll come back when it's more efficient. We're only seeing the fundamental failures of expectancy vs reality in the current state. It's too early to truly call it.

MagicShel ,

It’s on the falling edge of the hype curve. It’s quite expected, and you’re right about where it’s headed. It can’t do everything people want/expect but it can do some things really well. It’ll find its niche and people will continue to refine it and find new uses, but it’ll never be the threat/boon folks have been expecting.

People are using it for things it’s not good at thinking it’ll get better. And it has to an extent. It is technically very capable of writing prose or drawing pictures, but it lacks any semblance of artistry and it always will. I’ve seen trained elephants paint pictures, but they are interesting for the novelty, not for their expression. AI could be the impetus for more people to notice art and what makes good art special.

JiveTurkey ,

Useful in the way that it increases emissions and hopefully leads to our demise because that’s what we deserve for this stupid technology.

souperk ,
@souperk@reddthat.com avatar

While the consumption for AI train can be large, there are arguments to be made for its net effect in the long run.

The article’s last section gives a few examples that are interesting to me from an environmental perspective. Using smaller problem-specific models can have a large effect in reducing AI emissions, since their relation to model size is not linear. AI assistance can indeed increase worker productivity, which does not necessarily decrease emissions but we have to keep in mind that our bodies are pretty inefficient meat bags. Last but not least, AI literacy can lead to better legislation and regulation.

JiveTurkey ,

The argument that our bodies are inefficient meat bags doesn’t make sense. AI isn’t replacing the inefficient meat bag unless I’m unaware of an AI killing people off and so far I’ve yet to see AI make any meaningful dent in overall emissions or research. A chatgpt query can use 10x more power than a regular Google search and there is no chance the result is 10x more useful. AI feels more like it’s adding to the enshittification of the internet and because of its energy use the enshittification of our planet. IMO if these companies can’t afford to build renewables to support their use then they can fuck off.

technocrit ,

Using smaller problem-specific models can have a large effect in reducing AI emissions

Sure, if you consider anything at all to be “AI”. I’m pretty sure my spellchecker is relatively efficient.

AI literacy can lead to better legislation and regulation.

What do I need to read about my spellchecker? What legislation and regulation does it need?

Schal330 ,

Surely this is better than the crypto/NFT tech fad. At least there is some output from the generative AI that could be beneficial to the whole of humankind rather than lining a few people’s pockets?

JiveTurkey ,

Unfortunately crypto is still somehow a thing. There is a couple year old bitcoin mining facility in my small town that brags about consuming 400MW of power to operate and they are solely owned by a Chinese company.

EldritchFeminity ,

I recently noticed a number of bitcoin ATMs that have cropped up where I live - mostly at gas stations and the like. I am a little concerned by it.

technocrit ,

Do you really think that paper money covered in colonizers and other slavermasters is going to last forever?

circuscritic ,

lol

Forever? No, of course not.

But paper currency is backed by a nation state, so I’m betting it’ll be around a bit longer then a purely digital speculative asset without the backing of a nation, and driven entirely by speculation.

I’m not even anti-crypto. It was novel idea when it was actually used entirely as a currency, but that hasn’t been true for quite some time.

technocrit ,

I’m crypto neutral.

But it’s really strange how anti-crypto ideologues don’t understand that the system of states printing money is literally destroying the planet. They can’t see the value of a free, fair, decentralized, automatable, accounting systems?

Somehow delusional chatbots wasting energy and resources are more worthwhile?

circuscritic ,

Printing currency isn’t destroying the planet…the current economic system is doing that, which is the same economic system that birthed crypto.

Governments issuing currency goes back to a time long before our current consumption at all cost economic system was a thing.

SkyNTP ,

You are right, crypto has nothing to do with currency printing. And yes, the environmental side too is a problem (unless it is produced inline with recycled energy) But governments issuing currency is a relatively recent phenomenon. Historically, people traded de facto currencies and IOUs amongst themselves.

Bitcoin was conceived out of the 2008 financial crisis, as a direct response to big banks being bailed out. It’s literally written in Bitcoin’s Genesis block. The point of Bitcoin has always been to free people from the tyranny of big government AND big capital.

Crypto isn’t that popular in developed countries with functioning monetary systems… untill of course those big institutions fail. I am still quite surprised, this side of Bitcoin is rarely discussed on Lemmy, given how anticapitalist it is.

I get it libertarian, bad. And to some degree, there are a lot of problems there. But the extreme opposite ain’t that rosy either.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •